From: Dheeraj Reddy Jonnalagadda <dheeraj.linuxdev@gmail.com>
To: maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com, mripard@kernel.org,
tzimmermann@suse.de
Cc: airlied@gmail.com, simona@ffwll.ch, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: follow-up: Clarification on color parameter in drm_draw_fill24 function
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 15:55:13 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z2P0iY+EyIr7u7DM@HOME-PC> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z1rLpV+Rx7U0h2J/@HOME-PC>
On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 05:10:21PM +0530, Dheeraj Reddy Jonnalagadda wrote:
> Dear Maintainers,
>
> I am writing to seek clarification regarding the implementation of the
> drm_draw_fill24 function in the DRM subsystem. Specifically, Coverity has
> flagged (CID 1602416) the issue in the following line in drm/drm_draw.c
>
> --> iosys_map_wr(dmap, off + 2, u8, (color & 0x00FF0000) >> 16);
>
> I have some questions about handling of the color parameter in the function.
>
> The function currently accepts a u16 value as the color parameter and uses
> bitwise operations to extract the RGB components. However, the mask 0x00FF0000
> refers to bits 16–23, which are always zero for a u16 value. Therefore, the
> expression (color & 0x00FF0000) will always result in 0.
>
> Could you please confirm:
>
> 1. Is the truncation of 32-bit color value to 16 bits the intended behavior?
> 2. Alternatively, should the function be updated to accept 32-bit values
> as input as the function is called with 32 bit values elsewhere?
>
> Thank you for your time. Please let me know if further information or context
> is required.
>
> -Dheeraj
Dear Maintainers,
I am following up on my earlier query regarding the potential issue flagged by
Coverity (CID 1602416) in the drm_draw_fill24 function in drm/drm_draw.c.
Link to the Coverity issue:
https://scan7.scan.coverity.com/#/project-view/52348/11354?selectedIssue=1602416
The action field on Coverity has also been changed to "Fix required" for
this issue.
To summarize:
1. The color parameter is declared as a u16, but the bitwise operation
(color & 0x00FF0000) targets bits that do not exist within a u16
range, effectively always resulting in 0.
2. My query is whether this truncation is intentional or if the
function should be updated to accept a 32-bit color value, aligning
with its usage elsewhere.
I wanted to kindly ask if there has been any decision or additional insight
regarding this issue. If needed, I can provide a proposed patch to address the
problem once the intended behavior is clarified.
Thank you again for your time.
-Dheeraj
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-20 8:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-12 11:40 Clarification on color parameter in drm_draw_fill24 function Dheeraj Reddy Jonnalagadda
2024-12-19 10:25 ` Dheeraj Reddy Jonnalagadda [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Z2P0iY+EyIr7u7DM@HOME-PC \
--to=dheeraj.linuxdev@gmail.com \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
--cc=mripard@kernel.org \
--cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
--cc=tzimmermann@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox